What a horrible couple of years it’s been since the Aurora theater shooting — certainly for the victims and family members, but also for the parents of defendant James Holmes. They grieve, with little sympathy. They’re horrified by what occurred, but they also realize their son is seriously ill. They know he’s going to lose his freedom for life, but should their child — who did not choose to be ill — lose his actual life?

I agree with the Holmes family, and with Murder Victim Families for Human Rights, and the National Alliance on Mental Illness: This can be resolved quickly, with compassion for all — take the death penalty off the table.

Carla Turner, Denver

The writer is executive director of Coloradans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty.

This letter was published in the Dec. 26 edition.

The Post has become a (hopefully) unwitting dupe of the James Holmes defense team. The letter purportedly written by Holmes’ parents, and reportedly delivered by a family lawyer, is nothing more than an attempt to taint the jury pool and make an advance summation argument about why the death penalty should not be imposed.

For one thing, there is no such sentence as “life in a mental treatment facility.” Mental health perpetrators must be released upon being “cured” and deemed no longer a danger to society. Holmes’ end game has always been to beat the system by pretending to be crazy. The Post has no business supporting that ruse by publishing the self-serving drivel created, possibly by parents, but more likely by lawyers, to accomplish his goal.

And, one might ask, is it even plausible to think that the defense team’s lawyers had nothing to do with the drafting of this document?

Anthony T. Accetta, Denver

This letter was published in the Dec. 26 edition.

A few years ago, my good friend’s schizophrenic son stabbed his father 13 times before being pulled away and subdued. His father survived the mostly superficial wounds; the son went to prison.

Because of his history of mental illness, and because the victim was a family member, the son was moved to a mental hospital. He is now residing again with his family.

Knowing the anguish this family has suffered, my heart goes out to the Holmes family, whose suffering is compounded by the families of their son’s multiple victims.

At the time of this tragedy, as with others, the outcry took on the issue of gun control. Why have we not, instead, looked seriously at our lack of facilities for the mentally ill? How many must suffer from untreated mental illness? How many Auroras and Columbines will it take before we address the real problem?

Your editorial was unfair to James Holmes’ parents. In this capital case, two psychiatrist reports and much other evidence of Holmes’ mental condition remain under seal, as a necessary precaution against prospective jurors learning of it. It would be unreasonable for Holmes’ parents to break that seal of secrecy. Rather, they did something that needed to be done: they reminded us that taking their son’s life would be simply adding one more wrong to the ones already done. They therefore join with many in the community who see that the arc of memory should bend toward reconciliation and not toward vengeance. We don’t need mental health professionals to tell us that in a world filled with anger and grief, the killings need to stop.

Michael E. Tigar, Oriental, N.C.

This letter was published in the Dec. 26 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Last week, Texas was scheduled to execute a severely mentally ill man. In a last-minute decision, he was granted a stay of execution. There is no question that this man committed the crime and he deserves punishment. The real question is: Should we be executing a person who is mentally ill?

As The Post noted in its recent series on mental illness, lack of treatment and medication can substantially affect the behaviors of those with the most severe forms of mental illness, sometimes leading to violent crimes. However, should punishment be as severe as death? A recent nationwide poll conducted by the University of North Carolina found that Americans oppose the death penalty for persons with mental illness by 2 to 1.

This is a profound issue that is an important factor in Colorado’s continued conversation about the death penalty.

Kathleen McGuire, Centennial

This letter was published in the Dec. 8 edition.

Submit a letter to the editor via this form or check out our guidelines for how to submit by e-mail or mail.

Gov. John Hickenlooper holds a press conference at the Capitol on May 21, 2013, to discuss his granting convicted killer Nathan Dunlap a “temporary reprieve” from an execution. (Craig F. Walker, Denver Post file)

I have no qualms about individuals or even the Denver Post editorial board being for or against the death penalty, but politicians like Gov. John Hickenlooper must be clear on their position prior to elections. They are required by their oath to carry out the sentences. When faced with the decision last year, the governor took the coward’s way out with a temporary reprieve for Nathan Dunlap.

Now, in a yet-to-be-aired TV interview, Hickenlooper says one of his options, if he is not re-elected, might be to give Dunlap — the Chuck E. Cheese murderer of four workers — “clemency.” Really, governor?

I, along with other voters, would like a truthful answer to this question: What is Hickenlooper going to do about Dunlap if he is re-elected? That question must be answered soon.

Peter Bruno, Arvada

This letter was published in the Aug. 29 edition.

As a former death penalty prosecutor and frequent public speaker on the topic, it does not surprise me that the opponents of capital punishment are not interested in public dialogue on the subject. They fear the results of rational, fact-based discussion. They prefer to pick specific targets (DAs, judges, governors) and overwhelm them with biased half-truths and threats of huge costs that they, themselves, create. They hope to do individually what they don’t believe they can do collectively. Obviously this tactic has met with some success.

I took Gov. John Hickenlooper at his word when he expressed a desire for public discussion. Then I waited, and waited, and waited. I had thought he would support putting the question to the people through a referred ballot measure, a sure way to spur public dialogue. But, at the urging of death penalty opponents, he opposed this. Doesn’t seem like he wants to hear from the people, either.

Bob Grant, Brighton

The writer is a former district attorney for Adams and Broomfield counties. He prosecuted Gary Lee Davis, the last person to be executed by the state of Colorado.

This letter was published in the Aug. 29 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

As president of the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar, I agree with The Denver Post’s editorial that a life sentence without possibility of parole is the better alternative to the death penalty.

Dexter Lewis is accused of stabbing five people to death at Fero’s Bar and Grill in Denver in October 2012. (Denver Post file)

We are not personally connected to Dexter Lewis’ case; he is represented by public defenders. However, all Coloradans should question the fairness of the death penalty.

Studies show the incredibly capricious way the death penalty is sought and the arbitrariness that is part of our criminal justice system. Therefore, the attorneys for Lewis are right to question the constitutionality of seeking the death penalty.

Additionally, the decision to pursue the death penalty is made by one person, an elected official who can be influenced by politics rather than what is morally and legally correct.

It is clear that Colorado’s death penalty is a failed public policy that cannot be repaired and must be abolished.

Sean McDermott, Denver

This letter was published in the May 23 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, front, issues a statement to the media on the execution of Clayton Lockett as Oklahoma Secretary of Safety and Security Michael C. Thompson, back, listens in Oklahoma City on April 30. The botched execution of Lockett has outraged death penalty opponents. (Alonzo Adams, The Associated Press)

All the fuss regarding the death penalty should be about how to administer it. I don’t know who decided on the chemical cocktail method, but just putting the perp into a small, sealed room and then pumping carbon monoxide in would be painless, certain to be effective, and relatively fast.

Dave Miller, Sedalia

This letter was published in the May 7 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

It took 43 minutes for Oklahoma to kill convicted-killer Clayton Lockett in a botched execution. (AP Photo/Oklahoma Department of Corrections, File)

I am opposed to the death penalty. However, if the country insists upon it, we should do away with the charade of “humane” execution by lethal injection and revert to the firing squad. That would eliminate the need to find physicians willing to betray their Hippocratic Oath and the search for untested, expensive and difficult-to-procure drug combinations. There are plenty of people who would volunteer to “serve” on the squad, and God knows there will never be a shortage of bullets. Such a “protocol” would be cheaper, quicker and cleaner.

Elaine Zupancic, Denver

This letter was published in the May 6 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

I find it incredible that the media focused on Tuesday’s botched execution of Clayton Lockett in Oklahoma, on his pain and suffering, with little mention of his victims. Nineteen-year-old Stephanie Neiman was beaten and shot, forced to watch her grave being dug, and was buried alive. Lockett was also convicted of raping her friend. No one should have any sympathy for this heinous murderer.

Richard Pearson, Parker

This letter was published in the May 2 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Your editorial about the Montour trial was spot on. Thank you for so succinctly stating that life without parole was the right choice in this case. I’m glad the district attorney did the sensible thing and finally gave up pursuing the death penalty in exchange for Edward Montour’s guilty plea. This decision will prevent Montour from ever getting out of prison, it will prevent his name from continuing to be splashed across the headlines, it will save an estimated $1 million taxpayer dollars, and it will allow the Autobee family the closure they need to move on. Justice has indeed been carried out.

Heather Maresh, Centennial

This letter was published in the March 12 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

The Post asserts that the death penalty has “slowed justice” and has created “obstacles … in the prompt pursuit of justice” in the James Holmes case.

The overly long delay of the Holmes trial, however, has not been caused by the death penalty. It has been caused by a judge insufficiently committed to a speedy trial. A delay of the trial for three years after the crime was committed should not happen. Yes, the judge should proceed with care, but even if the lawyers are indecisive, hyperactively filing motion after motion, or always begging for more time, three years is too long, way too long to get to trial. One can be careful a lot faster than that.

Trial judges control their dockets and establish deadlines in each case. The Holmes case should have gone to trial last year, if not before.

Osborne Dykes, Denver

This letter was published in the March 5 edition.

It is clear from your editorial that there is frustration with the lengthy process of the justice system. While I do agree that three years is quite a ridiculous length of time for justice to be served, it is only apt that there are proper revisions and decisions made when dealing with a human being’s life. It is not acceptable for our justice system to be killing people on a whim just so justice can be served more rapidly. In due time, justice will be served. However, we have to allow time for the correct decision to be made.

Rylan Haag, Colorado Springs

This letter was published in the March 5 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

We support Robert Autobee’s courageous effort to oppose the death penalty for his son’s killer and disagree with the characterization of his protest as “futile.” We have each lost someone to a violent crime and know exactly how he feels. Mary Ricard, a sergeant in the kitchen at Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility, was killed by an inmate who is now facing first-degree murder charges. We sincerely hope that the prosecution does not seek the death penalty against him. Colleen O’Connor was murdered by Nathan Dunlap, whose death sentence was recently commuted by Gov. John Hickenlooper. Proponents of the death penalty often claim that it provides closure to the families of the victims. We learned firsthand that lengthy and costly death penalty trials deny closure and hinder families in the healing process and ability to make peace with their loss. They also sap resources and divert attention away from other critical public priorities, like prison safety and mental health treatment. Robert Autobee’s actions are far from futile. At this point, what else can he do to ensure that his son’s death does not perpetuate an immoral and unjust system?

Tim Ricard, Crowley

Jodie and Greg Damore, Aurora

Tim Ricard is the husband of Mary Ricard. Jodie and Greg Damore are Colleen O’Connor’s mother and stepfather.

This letter was published in the Jan. 17 edition.

For information on how to send a letter to the editor, click here. Follow eLetters on Twitter to receive updates about new letters to the editor when they’re posted.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.